Will County gas station plan faces key vote

Complex would be built at Harlem and 194th

March 20, 2013|By Dennis Sullivan and Alicia Fabbre, Special to the Tribune

Tinley Trails subdivision resident Gigi Schroeder and grandson Alexander in her backyard, which faces the site of a proposed complex consisting of a gas station, car wash, and minimart and fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru. "If it was a plain old gas station, it would be one thing, but this is a monster," she said. (Dennis Sullivan, Chicago Tribune)

The future of a controversial gas station project at Harlem Avenue and 194th Street is up to two key Will County Board members, according to the head of the board's Land Use and Development Committee.

Committee Chairman Tom Weigel said Thursday's board vote would be heavily influenced by the opinions of David Izzo and Jim Moustis, whose district encompasses the proposed Lenny's Gas N Wash in unincorporated Will County and the Tinley Park subdivision immediately west of the proposed project.

If Izzo and Moustis "come out strong, that might sway the County Board. I think that might make a difference," said Weigel, whose committee voted as follows last week to endorse:

•5-1, combining two lots into a single five-acre development.

•5-1, allowing drive-up food service.

•4-2, allowing a 150-foot-long car wash.

It also voted 3-3 on a special-use request to sell packaged liquor, meaning that issue is presented without a recommendation.

"Generally, I go along with the residents," said Weigel, attributing his four "no" votes at the committee meeting to comments by Tinley Trail subdivision residents Michelle Ansar, Linda Arnold and Sandra Rennie.

Of particular concern to the three are longtime Illinois Department of Transportation plans ruling out Harlem Avenue access between 194th and 195th streets.

They contend the development's resulting reliance on two east-west streets — Tinley Trails' east access points — would bring traffic and crime into the subdivision. They and other residents have also cited potential noise from the car wash, arguing the project would be too large for the area.

The Will County Land Use Department disagrees, recommending approval of the requests from Leonard McEnery.

Senior planner Michael Smetana said rezoning one of the lots to a less intensive use is necessary for the project, but McEnery "does not have to make a zoning request for the gas station."

But Rennie said at the County Board's Executive Committee meeting last week: "The gas station is not the issue. It's the excessive development he's proposing."

Subdivision resident Gigi Schroeder, whose backyard faces the proposed development site, agreed during an interview at her home.

"If it was a plain old gas station, it would be one thing, but this is a monster," she said.

Ansar, Arnold and Rennie point to the presence of other gas stations in the area, questioning the need for a gas station and car wash on five acres.

"There are similar facilities less than one mile down the road," Ansar said.

But Smetana said that argument supports the requests, noting both lots are already zoned commercial, and McEnery's proposal is consistent with development patterns and zoning classifications in the immediate area.

Although the Will County Planning and Zoning Commission voted against all four requests, neither Tinley Park nor Frankfort Township has objected.

Tinley Park Trustee Tom Staunton said it would take "an overwhelming reason" for the Village Board to oppose the project, which he said is consistent with the village's long-range planning.

Staunton said McEnery, whose brother operated the defunct Gas City chain, had responded to some objections by agreeing to move the diesel fueling station and mini-mart farther from the subdivision and limit the car wash hours to 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.

Moustis, who is also Frankfort Township supervisor, said township officials were unaware of the controversial nature of the development in 2012 when they voted not to object. In his role on the County Board, Moustis said he met with residents and McEnery and "tried to mitigate as many of their concerns as I could."

He refused to say which way he would vote Thursday, citing a potential lawsuit from McEnery if the board rejects the requests.

"I have to stay open to what I hear from committees and also these residents and their concerns," Moustis said.